Floor Statements

Offered By: Mr. Emanuel

Amendment No. 5: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

payments to state and local governments for infrastructure and social

services needs

Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my warmest congratulations to Desiree G. Rogers on being elected President of People's Gas and North Shore Gas, two utility subsidiaries of People's Energy Corporation.

People's Energy has, for 150 years, been committed to providing gas service to residential and business consumers in northeastern Illinois. Today, it serves an estimated one million people in Chicago and northeastern Illinois.

Based on Ms. Rogers' immense contributions to People's Energy since joining in 1997, I am confident that Ms. Rogers' new role will prove to be very beneficial to the company. In the past, Ms. Rogers has exhibited tremendous leadership skills by successfully taking on many of the company's difficult tasks.

As president of People's Gas and North Shore Gas, Ms. Rogers will have responsibility over the utilities' field operations, customer functions, and gas supply management. She will also continue to be in charge of customer relations, an area in which she has demonstrated to be very experienced.

As the former senior vice president of Customer Service of the utilities, Ms. Rogers was able to improve the company's financial results while establishing strong customer ties. Ms. Rogers first joined the company in 1997 as Vice President of Communications, and was named Chief Marketing Officer in 2000. She oversaw community affairs and governmental relations, in addition to operations and marketing of the company's utilities.

Ms. Rogers' leadership extends beyond her work with People's Energy. She is involved in several community organizations, including the Lincoln Park Zoo, of which she is the Vice Chairman, the Museum of Science and Industry, and the Executives' Club of Chicago. She was also the chairman of the Chicago Children's Museum for 3 years. Ms. Rogers has admirably used her success as a means to contribute to philanthropic organizations, such as the Y-Me National Breast Cancer Organization, of which she is a trustee. Ms. Roger's contributions to the Chicago community are truly commendable.

Once again, I would like to congratulate Desiree Rogers on her well deserved promotion to President of People's Gas and North Shore Gas, and wish her and the company continued success in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to extend my best wishes to everyone associated with Chicago's Lincoln Park Zoo on the occasion of its Swing! 2004 Zoo Ball. I would especially like to commend the Women's Board of Lincoln Park Zoo for starting what has become the zoo's largest fundraiser.

The Zoo Ball is always one of the highlights of Chicago's social scene, and this year's event promises to be no exception. Transforming the Zoo into a 1940's supper club complete with big bands and classic cocktails, the 2004 Zoo Ball will be an event not to be missed.

Chicago is proud to be home to one of the finest and oldest zoos in the Nation, serving the community since 1868. With over 3 million visitors every year, the Lincoln Park Zoo is consistently one of the top cultural and entertainment attractions in the city. Located within the beautiful confines of Lincoln Park, the Zoo is not only an attraction within our community, it is also an integral part of our community. The Lincoln Park Zoo is truly a unique cultural institution because it remains free to all its visitors, ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to learn about and appreciate the wonders of nature that exist in our world.

The Lincoln Park Zoo has earned a reputation as a world-class institution committed to conservation, science, and education. With state-of-the-art facilities such as the newly opened Regenstein Center for African Apes, the Zoo continues to provide the finest facilities for its inhabitants. With four times the size of the old building, the new building allows gorillas and chimpanzees to move freely from inside to outside facilities, and gives visitors an even fuller understanding of the lives of these immense creatures. The facility also serves as a research, training and education center that will enable conservationists and scientists from around the globe to study apes.

As with all great institutions, a lot of effort goes into maintaining excellence. The Lincoln Park Zoo is fortunate for the leadership provided by its president, Kevin Bell, and the dedication given by Jay Proops and other members of the Board of Directors. And I would like to particularly thank the Gala's Event Chairs, Josephine E. Heindel and Myra Reilly, and the President of the Women's Board of Lincoln Park Zoo, Debra Clamage.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to honor the hard work and dedication of the staff and friends of the Lincoln Park Zoo on the occasion of its Zoo Ball, and I thank everyone in attendance for ensuring that this jewel of Chicago continues to shine.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege today to recognize the contributions of Chicago's Irish American Heritage Center toward preserving the glorious heritage and culture of Chicago's Irish community, on the occasion of its Annual Irish Fest.

The Irish American Heritage Center continues to be an integral part of the Irish Community in Chicago. The Annual Irish American Heritage Festival on July 9th, 10th, and 11th will showcase many of the great traditions and

talents of Ireland. The festival will feature traditional Irish dancing, numerous musical acts, and the great Irish food we all love.

The Irish American Heritage Center has consistently demonstrated its commitment to keeping the Irish heritage alive and thriving in Chicago. Its museum, library, and festivals all contribute to the success of the organization, and I applaud those who work and volunteer their time to continue this important mission.

But, the Irish American Heritage Center festival is much more than good food and entertainment. It is a chance to remember and honor all of the hard work and accomplishments made by the Irish Community. It is through this awareness by which younger generations can pass on the traditions and values of Ireland.

The museum was officially opened by the President of Ireland, Mrs. Mary Robinson, on October 13, 1991. Museum acquisitions include: a magnificent collection of Belleek Parian China; a historic chair commissioned by the Irish Fellowship Club of Chicago on the occasion of the visit of U.S. President William Howard Taft on St. Patrick's Day 1910; and the first organ from St. Patrick's Church in St. Charles, Illinois.

The Irish American Heritage Centers Library houses many special collections, including a facsimile edition of the world's most famous illuminated manuscript, The Book of Kells, which has been described as the ``work of angels, not of men.''

Mr. Speaker, I am honored on behalf of the Fifth District, and indeed all of Chicago, to call attention to all of the meaningful work occurring at the Irish American Heritage Center at the time of its Irish American Heritage Festival. I wish the Center continued success and a fantastic Irish fest.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join with the Elderly Housing Development & Operations Corporation and the people of Chicago in honoring the late Jerry Prete with the dedication of the ``Appreciation Garden'' at North Park Village in Illinois. A man who committed himself to helping his fellow citizens, Jerry Prete lived life to its fullest. His family, friends and the seniors of the Chicago area are testament to the quality of his character, honor and integrity.

Jerry Prete achieved his success through hard work and determination. He dedicated his life to public service and the people of Chicago. An active member of the Christian Family Movement since 1950, he assisted in developing leadership training and motivation for them until the 1970s. In the 1960s, the Chicago Senior Senate was formed and expanded into 400 chapters with Jerry's leadership.

In this quest, Jerry united with the National Council of Senior Citizens to submit a proposal to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the funding of subsidized living at North Park Village. Today, the Prete, Senate, and North Park Village Apartments are considered some of the finest senior citizen apartment buildings in the Nation.

Jerry made a lifelong commitment towards helping seniors gain access to affordable housing--eventually assisting the implementation of about 30 multiple dwelling units around the United States. He was a champion of many causes for seniors including the expansion of Social Security and Medicare benefits, lowering the cost of prescription drugs, lowering taxes, and working toward the creation of the Circuit Breaker program.

Aside from working to help seniors, Jerry was a passionate advocate for the religious community. From the mid-1950s until 1995, Jerry and his wife Anne operated the Alverno Bookstore, which they established to meet the needs of the local Christian community.

Mr. Speaker, I join with the Elderly Housing Development & Operations Corporation and the seniors of North Park Village in honoring Jerry Prete. Today, numerous Chicagoans have reaped the benefits of one man's heroic dream. May God bless the Prete family and the memory of a man who was truly loved by his friends, his community and his family.

Mr. Chairman, I thank gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) for yielding me time.

Since 2001 the country has lost 2.7 million manufacturing jobs. Now, I offered an amendment which was President Bush's 21st Century Job Initiative in an act of bipartisanship. Let me quote what he said on April 5 when he introduced his initiative. ``We are not training enough people to fill the jobs for the 21st century. There is a skills gap,'' the President says, ``and if we do not adjust quickly, if we do not use our community colleges, we are going to have a shortage of skilled workers in the decades to come.''

Now, when you were designing this bill, you did not include the President's initiative on the 21st Century for manufacturing jobs, so I offered it as an amendment. What does the Committee on Rules do? They knock it down and said, forget it.

I do not know how many times you are going to show disrespect to the President of the United States when he is trying to help with manufacturing jobs. He did not come up here and lobby for it, though. He did not send anybody here to lobby for his initiative, so I do not really so much think that you are showing disrespect because why should you include something the President does not care about? But it makes sense. Every budget he has proposed, he has tried to eliminate the manufacturing extension program, and we have resulted in 2.7 million jobs lost.

On top of that, when the President's economic advisor issued a report, he wanted to redefine flipping hamburgers as a manufacturing job. That is one way America can regain the manufacturing jobs we lost in America. Redefine them. No disrespect to the hamburger flippers in America, but I think there is something critically important about training workers using community colleges to, in fact, add and increase 100,000 workers, as the President of the United States said, in the high technology area of manufacturing. But this bill does not include it.

I still will support this bill because I do not believe in making the perfect the enemy of the good, or in this case, the good the enemy of the adequate. And that is all this bill will try to do, adequately tread water.

The fact is we have lost jobs over the last 3 years in manufacturing, 2.7 million of them, and the result has been because of basic attitude towards the manufacturing sector of benign neglect. The net result is Americans have lost their jobs, their health care, their retirement and their kids' college education because of it. I tried to offer the President's own initiative for the 21st century, and we will lose those jobs because we are not doing what we should be doing in a bipartisan fashion.

Mr. Speaker, today it is my privilege to recognize the contributions of the Chicago Historical Society toward preserving our glorious heritage and the legacy of great Chicagoans, on the occasion of its 45th Annual 4th of July Celebration. America has come a long way since the Founding Fathers signed the Declaration of Independence, and I applaud the CHS for capturing the pivotal moments of this journey in its ``Documents of Freedom'' and ``Free to Vote'' exhibitions.

By consistently demonstrating its commitment to historical accuracy and preservation, the Chicago Historical Society has earned its place atop the pillar of Chicago's treasures. Its commitment to this cause makes it the perfect backdrop for a celebration of our nation's history on Independence Day.

We make the Fourth of July as the beginning of a revolution to secure those unalienable rights from tyranny, but the struggle began long before that date and would continue to be defended by Americans long afterward. Guided by courage, faith, respect for human dignity, and love of freedom, our forefathers fought valiantly to protect our ideals and liberties. In the two and a quarter centuries that have since passed, America has seen the highest peaks and preserved through some difficult times while the values that gave birth to our country have endured.

These values that we hold so dear are preserved for eternity here at the Chicago Historical Society. And as the Historical Society has earned its place as an integral element of Chicago's museum community, the 4th of July celebration has become ingrained in Lincoln Park's culture, and holds a permanent place on the community calendar. Men and women who grew up with their parents here on the 4th of July, now bring their children along with them. And so, these values and traditions will continue to be passed on to future generations.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the leadership of Lonnie Bunch, Hill Hammock, and the other leaders of the Chicago Historical Society on another fantastic 4th of July celebration. I hope that the Historical Society will continue to enrich our lives and educate Chicagoans for many, many more years.

Mr. Speaker, some people like to make experience the issue for the Vice President of the United States of America.

Let me ask how much experience does it take to wave the banner ``Mission Accomplished'' and watch another 700 Americans lose their lives and not change their policy? How much experience does it take to watch 44 million Americans without health insurance and have no policy for universal care? How much experience does it take to watch college costs rise by 26 percent and not pass or have any legislation to alleviate the financial pain for middle-class families when it comes to afford college education for their children? How much experience does it take to watch $200 billion worth of retirement savings evaporate and not have a plan for retirement security? How much experience does it take to see household bankruptcies rise by over a third in this country and not have a plan to deal with household bankruptcy? How much experience does it take to watch health care costs rise by a third and not have a plan to deal with the uncontrollable health care inflation in this country?

I am not sure we can take this much experience from the Bush-Cheney administration for another 4 years.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from upstate New York for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong opposition to this rule because I had offered an amendment that was to literally add President Bush's own legislative initiative, the Jobs for the 21st Century Initiative.

On April 5, President Bush, finally realizing that we had a crisis in America of a loss of manufacturing jobs, offered the Jobs Initiative For the 21st Century. That was on April 5, just a short time ago. He said, and let me quote President Bush, ``We are not training enough people to fill the jobs for the 21st century. There is a skills gap. And if we do not adjust quickly, if we do not use our community colleges, we will have a shortage of skilled workers in the decades to come.''

Now, this is a rare moment of bipartisanship on my side. I agreed with the President, and I thought he was right. Now, what happened? You all craft a piece of legislation, and showing a total disrespect for President Bush, you did not include his own initiative on manufacturing jobs.

So I picked up the mantle, and I offered his amendment, his concept, his ideas that he put together; and the Committee on Rules did not think it was worthy of being included. It may not be. Maybe President Bush is not that smart when it comes to manufacturing jobs. He did lose 2.7 million manufacturing jobs under his watch.

The other side of the aisle, when they drafted the legislation, did not include it. There was an amendment offered by a Democrat, and they did not include that amendment. I cannot think of anything more disrespectful to the President than what the majority has done by not including his ideas, his concepts of how to prepare American workers for the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, they left it on the editing floor. I gave them an opportunity, and they chose partisanship and politics over the skills of American workers for the 21st century.

However, I took a step back and thought about it. It makes total sense to me now that I think about it, because, in fact, the program that we are authorizing, the manufacturing extension program, President Bush has tried to eliminate every year in his budget. As a matter of fact, just a short time ago in his economic plan, his economic advisers said flipping hamburgers should be redefined as a manufacturing job. No disrespect to our hamburger flippers in America, McDonald's and Wendy's and Burger King, they work and do a good job; and we are outperforming Japan and Germany and China in the hamburger-flipping business.

But when this administration has an economic strategy that defines hamburger flipping as a manufacturing job, that literally tries to eliminate the manufacturing extension program year after year, and now in their moment of shame, after 3\1/2\ years of being the stewardship of lost jobs, they try to act in this holy picture that they are doing something, not one Republican had the common sense or decency or courtesy to include the President's own plan. And I tried to do it and was shown total disrespect.

Mr. Speaker, the President was not even up here, nor were the President's lobbyists up here, trying to get his initiative included. There is a reason we have lost 2.7 million jobs in manufacturing, because the other side of the aisle does not have a strategy for it and does not give a whit for it.

Mr. Speaker, I will probably in the end vote for the bill because there are some good things in here, but what has become clear to all of us is the President and this Congress run by Republicans do not care about 21st century jobs and the technical skills and the training that is required to fill those jobs.

As the President said, we can add and train an additional 100,000 workers each year, but what did the other side of the aisle do? They left those 100,000 workers and their skills on the editing floor.

Mr. Speaker, Inspector General's report released yesterday determined that the Medicare actuary provided accurate cost information about the Medicare bill to a select group of Members of Congress but not to all Members of Congress. This was because the Medicare administrator at the time threatened the actuary, Richard Foster, with the loss of his job if he disclosed the accurate information to all Members of Congress. These Members, the select group, chose to keep this information to themselves from other Members of Congress and, more importantly, from all the American taxpayers who are footing the bill for the $550 billion Medicare bill.

When we debated the Medicare bill on this floor, leaders in this Congress told us it would cost $400 billion, and we believed that this was true to the best of their knowledge. It is unfortunate that Members of this House were disrespectful to the taxpayers who are now going to pay an additional $150 billion, and with their colleagues, they withheld essential information about the true cost of the prescription drug bill. Even before a single senior citizen has received the benefit, taxpayers will be hit with another $150 billion bill.

This unwelcome surprise could have been avoided if this administration, Members of Congress and the leadership had shared the information they had about this bill.

Mr. Speaker, as someone concerned with the health of the Great Lakes, I rise in support of H.R. 1856, the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research Amendments Act.

I would also like to thank my distinguished colleague from Michigan for offering this bill as well as for his leadership on this and other issues of importance to the Great Lakes.

As has been noted, harmful algal blooms are dense patches of toxic algae, which can poison marine life.

Harmful algal blooms can also become airborne and cause respiratory problems in humans.

Worse still, when the toxic algae decays, it can cause hypoxia, or a condition where all the oxygen in the water surrounding the algal bloom is consumed, resulting in a ``dead zone'' where no living thing can survive.

These algal blooms plague the Gulf of Mexico, the Chesapeake Bay and many of the Great Lakes, notably Lake Erie.

In fact, a recent report estimates that more than half of the Nation's estuaries experience hypoxic conditions at some time each year.

Economic impact of harmful algal blooms in United States average annually $50 million, but individual outbreaks can cause economic damage that far exceed the annual average.

Total public health impacts due to shellfish poisoning from harmful algal blooms averaged $22 million between 1987-1992.

H.R. 1856 will help us to better understand harmful algal blooms by increasing and updating research programs at NOAA.

But, importantly, H.R. 1856 will begin new research into Great Lakes algal blooms, which present different challenges and concerns than their ocean relatives.

Indeed, this bill will do a lot to help us better understand just one of the many problems facing the Great Lakes, and ultimately help us to begin to restore the health of one of our greatest national treasures.

This bill is a good first step, and I hope it will renew this body's interest in providing resources to conserve our nation's lakes and oceans, including the Great Lakes.

For this reason I support H.R. 1856, and urge my colleagues to do so as well.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. Speaker, just last week the American Association of Retired Persons released a study showing that drug prices rose in the last year by nearly 4 percent in the first quarter of last year, putting us on target for what has happened in the last 5 years every year in a row where the price of prescription drugs have risen on average 17 percent each year compounded, growing the cost for our senior citizens, their families that help their grandparents and parents to afford their drugs. And now that we have a prescription drug bill, it is going to also cost our taxpayers continuously more and more money to try to pay for that medication.

We have known for the last year prices were going to go up close to about 17 percent; the year before that, 19 percent; the year before that, 20 percent; and the year before that, 18 percent, drug prices had gone up. We passed a prescription drug bill to try to deal with what seniors have said is the number one issue that affected them and their pocketbooks, which is that they could not afford the medications they need that their doctors were prescribing.

And let just take one step back. This Congress passed a prescription drug bill designed not with seniors in mind, but with HMOs and pharmaceutical companies. Just take their discount card for a second: all this press around a discount card the government was going to offer, 17 different plans. Some drugs covered, other drugs not covered. And some drugs, when they are covered, could get dropped a week later and people are locked into that plan.

Think about it. If one were designing a plan for senior citizens, if one were designing a plan for the customer, would they have designed that plan as is? No. The only reason that plan and the discount card was designed that way was because it was designed to help the pharmaceutical industry and the HMOs that had contributed over $250 million in the last election cycle and hired over 900 lobbyists to lobby that bill. That bill was not designed with senior citizens in mind. It was not designed to try to save them money. That bill, that legislation and the discount card, was designed for the people who paid for it.

We have a piece of legislation that was passed here in the House that dealt with allowing people to do what people have been doing and senior citizens have been doing for the last 10 years, to buy the prescription drugs they need from Canada and Europe where prices are 30 to 80 percent cheaper than they are here in the United States, allowing, finally, the United States to have a free market where we have competition and prices come down due to competition.

I did a study on my Web site from Costco, a discount retailer in my district and a discount retailer in Toronto, Costco to Costco, Chicago to Toronto; and the prescription drugs and medications at the Costco in Toronto are 40 to 60 percent cheaper than they are in Chicago, the same medications that we can find on the shelves in Costco in Chicago as on the shelves at Costco in Toronto. And why is that? They have lower prices there. And senior citizens, 1 million to 2 million a year, go over the border to buy their medications that their doctors prescribe in Canada, saving themselves thousands upon thousands of dollars.

They can do it in Europe where they also provide medications. The same things, the same types of medications that our doctors prescribe here, they get at 50 percent cheaper.

Why would we force our senior citizens into higher prices and our taxpayers to pay higher prices to support

higher prices when we could allow the free market to finally operate?

I understand why the pharmaceutical industry would pay about 200- some-odd million dollars in the last year and would hire 900-plus lobbyists. They have got a sweet deal going. They should fight for the deal they got. But we here fought on behalf of the people who elected us. Eighty-eight Republicans and 153 Democrats in the House voted in favor of allowing reimportation, allowing people access to affordable medications at world-class prices because people from around the world come to America for their medical care; yet Americans are forced to go around the world for their medications. And we here in the House stood up to the special interests.

Later this week, the other body is going to take up that legislation. Having failed to deal with the number one issue of price and affordability of prescription drugs, they are now going to take up what we here in the House have done, which is allowing people the access to medications in Canada and in Europe where prices are much cheaper for the same name-brand drugs, name-brand drugs that we find in the shelves over there in Canada that we find here, but 30 to 80 percent cheaper.

They are going to take up that legislation because they now have spent months talking to constituents, doing town halls, and they have found out what senior citizens have been telling us for the last 6 years: they cannot afford the medications that their doctors are prescribing. They are forced to pick between the medications and their food. They are forced to give up their month to allow their spouse to buy their medications. They are forced into cutting pills in half.

It is time that we allow the free market to operate, bring competition to the pricing of prescription drugs and allow the prices to be driven down to world prices where they are 30 to 50 percent cheaper than they are here in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday it was reported that the pharmaceutical industries and HMO industries spent $141 million with the prescription drug bill. With the Medicare bill, taxpayers will give HMOs an additional $46 billion and they will give the pharmaceutical industry an additional $139 billion.

Where else in America can you invest $141 and get a $185 billion return on your money? The GOP Congress, but of course.

By overpaying private insurance companies, denying the Secretary of Health and Human Services the ability to negotiate for lower prices and blocking the free market from working and allowing Americans to get safe, affordable drugs from Canada and Europe, the Medicare bill is everything the HMOs and pharmaceutical companies paid for and requested.

We are doing everything we can in this bill except the things that will actually lower prescription drug prices.

Yesterday the Bush administration announced that they will provide drug coverage to patients with some serious diseases, less than 10 percent of them though. They will decide which seriously ill individuals will get their Medicare coverage now by the lottery. There are 600,000 people eligible for medical coverage, but we are denying this coverage to 90 percent of them, cancer patients, people with multiple sclerosis, and arthritis. We can do better in lowering the prices of drugs than by lottery.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rochester for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and the Democratic substitute.

It would have made incredible common sense to deal with the budget reform before voting on the budget. But that kind of common sense regularly escapes the majority, and that is why there has been a 4- month impasse on their budget between the two Chambers, their party.

The truth is this Congress has been on a recess on dealing with the crisis that is facing the American people for the last year dealing with health care costs, college costs, and retirement savings problems. You are scared to be honest with the American people about the fact that you have been on a recess. But given how they feel about this Congress and given the fact that they have given you a failing grade so far, none of these Hail Mary passes is going to confuse them about where you are and what you have done in addressing their health care crisis, their college education crisis, and their savings crisis.

This bill ignores the advice of Chairman Greenspan, who said it would be a grave mistake to let go of the PAYGO budget rules. This bill even ignores the advice of the gentleman from Iowa, chairman of the Committee on the Budget, who said just 2 years ago the PAYGO rules contributed to obtaining the deficits. The chairman voted for those rules in 1997. That vote ensured that we made choices, lived within our means, and were accountable for what we do. Maybe with maturity over the last 2 years, he has decided to change his view on that. It is possible. Or maybe like the rest of us, he got the disease that is rampant in Washington

where one is firm in one's opinions, but very flexible on one's principles. That is a possibility too.

The 1990s were good economic times. We created 22 million jobs, raised income for all levels, had more access for the uninsured to health care. College was more accessible to more Americans, and savings were up. We balanced the budget and accumulated surpluses reaching nearly $300 billion. And what we did not do was say that every tax cut is good or every tax cut is bad. We made choices. We made choices on spending.

In the 1993 budget, we cut taxes for the middle class, and we also reduced spending. In 1997 we cut taxes for people earning $100,000 and, yes, gave them the first-ever $500-per-child tax cut. And we made choices by investing in children's health care, investing in the environment, investing in Medicaid, and also investing in people's retirement and strengthening our Social Security system.

But your economic plan has led to $3 trillion in additional debt, an annual budget deficit of $500 billion, 44 million Americans without health insurance, 2 million more middle-class families who have moved from the middle class to poverty, and the highest rate of foreclosures in the last 3 years on personal bankruptcy. You have turned your back on what worked in the 1990s.

And let me add one additional point. The majority party in the 1990 budget did not vote for it. It took Democratic votes that put us on the path to fiscal discipline. The majority party in 1993 contributed not a single vote that built on the 1990 agreement that also reduced the deficit and put us on the path to a balanced budget. You did not become a player in deficit discipline until 1997 with that agreement, which was the last yard.

So let us not rewrite history here. Some of us do not have a foggy memory of what happened in the 1990 agreement, the 1993 agreement. We made choices and difficult choices, and some sat on the sidelines and were really good critics.

Mr. Speaker, this so-called budget process bill says hands off when it comes to making the tough choices, and it says that we do not have the political courage to make those choices.

We must make choices when it comes to tax cuts and spending and be honest with the American people, but it takes both to deal with putting our fiscal house back in order.